This is more than DRM because the gamer gets substantial benefits from the online connection. Two of the biggest are easy access to multiplayer games and increased protection from hacks. Neither could be provided without the online requirement—online-only means a large multiplayer population, and protecting the server code makes it difficult to hack.

Converting a cloud game to a single player game through reverse engineering is taking what the publisher hasn’t given you, and changing it to something else—with completely different benefits. It’s not fighting DRM. It’s taking what’s not yours.

WarpCrow wrote on May 11, 2012, 12:34:It's funny that Blizzard have been able to take the same thing PC gamers crucified Ubisoft for, take it to even further extremes, and successfully sell it as a feature.

Because people eat whatever Blizzard shoves down their throats without thinking twice about it, because people are idiots. In the entire world, 99% of people are idiots.

Burrito of Peace wrote on May 11, 2012, 12:19:What if I just stopped buying games? No, I don't mean switching to exclusively pirating them. I mean just stopped being a customer altogether.

I know that I would find a new hobby or devote more time to a preexisting one but I don't think it would do anything positive to change this behavior of "stick it to the customer at all costs".

Perhaps the only real solution is piracy,

Piracy is the only thing keeping developers and publishers somewhat in check. They already treat their customers like dirt so imagine what it would be like if the threat of piracy was taken completely off the table. If the next generation consoles end up going the always-on internet connection/digital distribution/cloud gaming route, it's all over but the crying. Video games companies can't be trusted with that kind of power.

While the debates about piracy will continue, arguing that ninjas are as righteous as their pirate forebears becomes much more difficult.

LOL, I thought this was going to be an argument why cloud gaming is dangerous for the consumer because you're being spied on and your person info is being sold all the time.

But oh no! The article is explaining how playing the game outside of blizzards official server is so much worse than piracy ever was because creating those emulators are trade secrets and were never meant for you! You have no right to play this game on your own! You're worse than pirates ever were because you're stealing stuff that belongs to blizzard! Worse it's secret stuff so you're a NINJA!

Subjectively there *are* no shades of grey you either have an opinion or you do not. You can not half-have an opinion. Once you decided on an opinion and you are not self-righteous about it then one has to wonder whether your critical thought isn't a bit over critical. If you do not accept that your opinion CAN be the best one then you are living in a world where you do not accept your own opinion as possible truth. And that means you lie to yourself.

an opinion is formed *after* critical thought. Therefor if you are not considering your own opinion as a possible truth, you are not even having an opinion in the first place.

So to put it in your words, not admitting that ones subjective view can be the truth is as much willful ignorance as the opposite of that. And there is also to debate what opinions are really your "own" in the first place.

Well I get what the author is saying but at the same time when the industry continually revokes parts of traditional ownership then they have to expect some bounceback from consumers. Many of the so called "advantages" to cloud ownership are a bit dubious and equally weighted towards the publisher.

Whats their argument against piracy of cloud games anyway? That we steal the client that wouldn't work anyway unless an *extra* application emulates B.net and thus the game? How is that even illegal? It would essentially be a new and potentially different game!

We are not even gaining access to the game they sell to "customers" in any way so we are not pirating the game at all. And clearly they don't intend to sell the version pirates want.. so what is their argument? The black market responds to demand when Blizzard doesn't.

Heck, at that point the actual game is whatever emulator database gets it to work in the first place. Essentially meaning, you can not pirate Diablo 3.

You do not own anything when you buy Diablo 3 (or any other cloud-only game). I for one fully condone piracy of cloud games, because they take away all rights of consumers. And a consumer without rights is nothing but a thing to a company, a thing that constantly creates profit without any rights whatsoever.

So what right does a company have to forbid piracy... we have are granted no rights, so the company deserves none either. Fight fire with fire, and all that.

Hmmm lets try to reverse the argument. Does the consumer actually own the client files? Does he rent them? Who owns what here? If I spend 60 bucks on Diablo3, did I actually buy the game? Do I own it? What portion of the game do I own? If I have to stream and access data all the time for the game to even load (monsters, levels, items, etc) did I even BUY the game, or did I pay a one time subscription fee??

And now the most important questions: What happens when the servers are down?

Im not condoling piracy here, Im just saying. EULAs suck. They are unconstitutional and have always infringed on the rights of the consumer/customer.